Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#370 Mar 18, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
Ii'll bet they were wetting their pants when Rick French went to the basement, and later totally amazed her didn't find the body.
<quoted text>
I'll bet that's one of the main reasons Patsy looked at French through splayed fingers as she sat upstairs in the sun room waiting for ... what ... French to say he'd found the body? Followed by an "Oh my gosh! Why is he just standing there when he knows she's in the basement?"

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#371 Mar 18, 2013
Marleysghost wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll bet that's one of the main reasons Patsy looked at French through splayed fingers as she sat upstairs in the sun room waiting for ... what ... French to say he'd found the body? Followed by an "Oh my gosh! Why is he just standing there when he knows she's in the basement?"
I'm sure Patsy kept her eyes open for everything, whether through splayed fingers or not. When Fleet White called for an ambulance, Patsy didn't even get up. When someone calls for an ambulance, first thoughts are that someone is alive and needs medical attention. I guess she knew that an ambulance is not really what they needed.

She made no attempt to get up or call for an ambulance. After Arndt declared her dead, then Patsy knew enough to get up and throw herself all over JBR, assuring that evidence would be tainted.

Since: May 11

AOL

#372 Mar 18, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure Patsy kept her eyes open for everything, whether through splayed fingers or not. When Fleet White called for an ambulance, Patsy didn't even get up. When someone calls for an ambulance, first thoughts are that someone is alive and needs medical attention. I guess she knew that an ambulance is not really what they needed.
She made no attempt to get up or call for an ambulance. After Arndt declared her dead, then Patsy knew enough to get up and throw herself all over JBR, assuring that evidence would be tainted.
John took his turn rubbing all over the body too..Arndt said he moaned a bit and next thing you know, JR's calling his pilot. If Patsy didn't know to get up, JR didn't know that a blue child with a rope around the neck means DEAD, so they're both either stupid as IDI or they thought the cops were.
JR said it looked like an "inside job", but he couldn't tell JBR was dead? LOL

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#373 Mar 18, 2013
That is pretty funny when you say it like that!
realTopaz wrote:
JR said it looked like an "inside job", but he couldn't tell JBR was dead? LOL

Since: May 11

AOL

#374 Mar 18, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
That is pretty funny when you say it like that!
<quoted text>
pretty pathetic, if you ask me. JR's a laugh riot if you pay attention to all he says..like a developmentally challenged man that has no business being left alone with the kitchen stove or a book of matches. "we're not mad"..so stupid!

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#375 Mar 18, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Understanding is not the issue. It is understood but since it isn't what some want to hear, the same old argument continues as if they don't "get it"
All anyone has to do, despite the claims of having "tried", is to look at this with an RDI perspective, whether that is what you believe or not, and then anyone would realize why the note was written. Any "accident" that they could come up with, along with an explanation would have to coincide with the type and severity of the injuries she sustained. Since the Ramseys don't know exactly what will be found during an autopsy (other than the vaginal prior trauma), claiming an accident would not have washed and all hell would have broken loose
The Ramseys did exactly what they NEEDED to do. Those who "don't understand" or get it don't understand intentionally and will never admit that the note makes all the sense in the world
There comes a time when discussion is futile about it with anyone who intentionally won't "get it"
It contradicts everything they believe so no, they won't understand it, get it, or admit the reality
“We” understand what RDI are saying. We just don’t find it reasonable or sensible because a ransom note only explains a body removed from the house and becomes nonsensical with a body in the house. A ransom note is only reasonable with an entry/exit point and becomes unreasonable with a body in the house and no entry/exit point.

If the Ramseys neither could nor would remove the body from the house AND if they believed that they needed an intruder, then they needed to create an entry/exit point for the intruder. They could have made up whatever story or scene that they wanted.

In the case of a claimed accident, whether any claimed accident matched injuries discovered at autopsy is beside the point. If the injuries didn’t match then maybe the Ramseys would have ended up in jail. It’s a chance taken and they would have had no way of knowing the outcome of an autopsy or any resulting investigation.


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#376 Mar 18, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
Also, the assault WAS part of the staging. Wiping and redressing her had nothing to do with the assault or effort to cover it up.
Even the most naive of people understand that an autopsy will be performed and the prior sexual abuse would be found. Their overall naivety led them to believe that the new assault would somehow cover up the old assaults
It didn't
However would they have explained that?
You realize that the prior assault(s) were not covered up and yet act as if the prior assault(s) were not discovered. You ask, how the Ramseys would explain the prior assault as if they were not discovered and the questions were not asked!

The prior assault(s) were discovered and nothing came of it. This shows that the Ramseys had nothing to fear from it and there was no need for them to cover it up.

Regardless, it has not been established that the Ramseys were aware of any previous molestations never mind being involved in any of it. Nor has it been established that any previous molestations are in any way connected to the crime.


AK

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#377 Mar 18, 2013
You are truly reaching AK

They DID try to create the basement window as the entry point. They also tried to utilize the "everyone known to man had their key", and of course, the unsure responses about locking the doors; all of them, etc.

A body in the house WITHOUT a ransom note would require LOTS more explaining

You don't have to find it reasonable or sensible. You asked why they would write a note and that was answered Nobody is trying to force you to believe the answers.

You have every right to be wrong. This is America :)
kat

Riverhead, NY

#378 Mar 18, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
“We” understand what RDI are saying. We just don’t find it reasonable or sensible because a ransom note only explains a body removed from the house and becomes nonsensical with a body in the house. A ransom note is only reasonable with an entry/exit point and becomes unreasonable with a body in the house and no entry/exit point.
If the Ramseys neither could nor would remove the body from the house AND if they believed that they needed an intruder, then they needed to create an entry/exit point for the intruder. They could have made up whatever story or scene that they wanted.
In the case of a claimed accident, whether any claimed accident matched injuries discovered at autopsy is beside the point. If the injuries didn’t match then maybe the Ramseys would have ended up in jail. It’s a chance taken and they would have had no way of knowing the outcome of an autopsy or any resulting investigation.

AK
dude, give it a rest...you are just talking in circles now and you know it. you have asked the question of why the ramseys would write the ransom note...now i could see not understanding if it did work to help their case but it WORKED...not only that but several people have articualted for you both why they likely did it, and the advantage it gave them--people have explained with prose, people have explained with lists, again and again. and you keep asking the same question. if you don't get it now, just give up---you'll never get it. you also have brought up the point of why they didn't do more to stage the intruder aspect. and, that has been similarly answered for you, ad nauseum, over and over and over again. no offense, ak, but who else of you thinks it might be time to disengage and give ak some time to draw himself a diagram to help him process the information and otherwise stop responding...just like some people have the type of higher-order logic needed to say, score well on an iq test, others don't. you can keep giving them versions of the test over and over, but their score will always fall within a set range...

Since: May 11

AOL

#379 Mar 18, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
You are truly reaching AK
They DID try to create the basement window as the entry point. They also tried to utilize the "everyone known to man had their key", and of course, the unsure responses about locking the doors; all of them, etc.
A body in the house WITHOUT a ransom note would require LOTS more explaining
You don't have to find it reasonable or sensible. You asked why they would write a note and that was answered Nobody is trying to force you to believe the answers.
You have every right to be wrong. This is America :)
never mind Cap, it's like talking to Jodi Arias..round and round and round until you wish she would kill you, too! lol

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#380 Mar 18, 2013
I tell ya - first it was DNA and now it's Kolar -what's next?
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
never mind Cap, it's like talking to Jodi Arias..round and round and round until you wish she would kill you, too! lol

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#381 Mar 18, 2013
kat wrote:
<quoted text> dude, give it a rest...you are just talking in circles now and you know it. you have asked the question of why the ramseys would write the ransom note...now i could see not understanding if it did work to help their case but it WORKED...not only that but several people have articualted for you both why they likely did it, and the advantage it gave them--people have explained with prose, people have explained with lists, again and again. and you keep asking the same question. if you don't get it now, just give up---you'll never get it. you also have brought up the point of why they didn't do more to stage the intruder aspect. and, that has been similarly answered for you, ad nauseum, over and over and over again. no offense, ak, but who else of you thinks it might be time to disengage and give ak some time to draw himself a diagram to help him process the information and otherwise stop responding...just like some people have the type of higher-order logic needed to say, score well on an iq test, others don't. you can keep giving them versions of the test over and over, but their score will always fall within a set range...
Circular reference - the IDI Mantra, LOL!
You nailed it in this post.

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#382 Mar 18, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
You are truly reaching AK
They DID try to create the basement window as the entry point. They also tried to utilize the "everyone known to man had their key", and of course, the unsure responses about locking the doors; all of them, etc.
A body in the house WITHOUT a ransom note would require LOTS more explaining
You don't have to find it reasonable or sensible. You asked why they would write a note and that was answered Nobody is trying to force you to believe the answers.
You have every right to be wrong. This is America :)
There is no evidence that shows that the Ramseys tried to create a basement window entry point. All they had to say was that doors were unlocked, instead they said they were locked.

Bodies without ransom notes are routine. Bodies in the house with ransom notes are not. This is the whole problem and one of the primary reasons RDI use to argue against an intruder – an intruder would not leave a note and a body. If you all are going to argue that an intruder would not leave a note and a body it becomes nonsensical to turn around an argue that a Ramsey would leave a note and a body in an attempt to make it look like an intruder was responsible.


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#383 Mar 18, 2013
kat wrote:
<quoted text> dude, give it a rest...you are just talking in circles now and you know it. you have asked the question of why the ramseys would write the ransom note...now i could see not understanding if it did work to help their case but it WORKED...not only that but several people have articualted for you both why they likely did it, and the advantage it gave them--people have explained with prose, people have explained with lists, again and again. and you keep asking the same question. if you don't get it now, just give up---you'll never get it. you also have brought up the point of why they didn't do more to stage the intruder aspect. and, that has been similarly answered for you, ad nauseum, over and over and over again. no offense, ak, but who else of you thinks it might be time to disengage and give ak some time to draw himself a diagram to help him process the information and otherwise stop responding...just like some people have the type of higher-order logic needed to say, score well on an iq test, others don't. you can keep giving them versions of the test over and over, but their score will always fall within a set range...
It doesn’t matter how you explain it, nonsense will always be nonsense. The problem isn’t with me, it’s with the (RDI) nonsense. If the body was removed from the house, then (assuming RDI) the ransom would make sense. Since, the body was not removed, the note becomes nonsense.

The truth is that there isn’t a single RDI who doesn’t see the ransom note as evidence against the Ramseys. So, the idea that the ransom note “worked” for them is also nonsense.


AK
Anti-A

Tempe, AZ

#384 Mar 18, 2013
post #375, 376 & 377 were all posted within one minute of each other. so unless you can type 110 words a minute capricorn then you must be anti-k.
How about we just call you Miss Lin da for short. That is your name correct.
The Truth Hurts

Livonia, MI

#385 Mar 18, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Stage whatever you want, but a ransom note only makes sense if you get rid of the body because that’s the only thing that a ransom note explains – no body in the house. No entry/exit was staged and the doors were locked, so this makes the ransom note even more bizarre and unreasonable.
A ransom note doesn’t point to an intruder when there is no entry/exit point and no kidnapping.

AK
Please don't make anyone explain AGAIN why the Ramseys needed to write that note.

Please don't make anyone explain AGAIN why the body wasn't removed.

And there you go again with the "all the doors were locked" BS. Have we not established that JR later recanted that they were all locked? The alleged open window was staged. It doesn't matter what JR initially told the cops. Why did he change his story later?

Seriously, having discussion with you is on par with slamming my head repeatedly into a brick wall. Same results. ;)
The Truth Hurts

Livonia, MI

#386 Mar 18, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no evidence that shows that the Ramseys tried to create a basement window entry point. All they had to say was that doors were unlocked, instead they said they were locked.
Bodies without ransom notes are routine. Bodies in the house with ransom notes are not. This is the whole problem and one of the primary reasons RDI use to argue against an intruder – an intruder would not leave a note and a body. If you all are going to argue that an intruder would not leave a note and a body it becomes nonsensical to turn around an argue that a Ramsey would leave a note and a body in an attempt to make it look like an intruder was responsible.

AK
So I guess nobody did it according to your "logic."
kat

Riverhead, NY

#387 Mar 18, 2013
lol hey ak--you know what they should have done to show an intruder did it...they should have left the front door open and then acted completely shocked that it was open when the first officer arrived. patsy could emphatically throw herself into the door, weeping and wailing...your quote 'all they had to do was say the doors were unlocked'...that would be all they had to do for what purpose--to ensure they wouldn't be suspects. you're genius..if they just left a door ajar, or just STATED that the doors were open and your right--there would never have been an inquiry into whether j or p did it. case closed. they said the doors were open--there must have been an intruder. case closed lol

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#388 Mar 18, 2013
Anti-A wrote:
post #375, 376 & 377 were all posted within one minute of each other. so unless you can type 110 words a minute capricorn then you must be anti-k.
How about we just call you Miss Lin da for short. That is your name correct.
I believe Anti K said she composes all her posts in Word and copies and pastes them to the board.

Have you never seen 2 posters post at the same time? Are you new to the forums?
Anti-A

Tempe, AZ

#389 Mar 18, 2013
So who do you think killed the little girl Legal_Eagle?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Karr's Christmas Message 1 hr Capricorn 11
News GLOBE: JonBenet Ramsey Murder Was Inside Job - ... 8 hr robert 2
John Ramsey Role 11 hr Justice1313 21
James Kolar book: Foreign Faction: Who really... (Jul '12) 11 hr Justice1313 1,048
ICU2 's Child Trafficking 11 hr ICU2 154
Chief James Kolar on the JonBenet Ramsey case, ... (Aug '13) Apr 15 Steve Eller 326
Chief Kolar's AMA on Reddit Apr 14 Just Wondering 157
More from around the web